Submarine news

This is a discussion on Submarine news within the Navy & Maritime forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; Originally Posted by Volkodav
What I would love to see is the external conformal weapons stowage put forward by EB ...

What I would love to see is the external conformal weapons stowage put forward by EB years ago. Basically encapsulated missiles etc. are carried in and fired from tubes lying flush with the casing, raised fired then retracted as required.

there was some very sexy tech proposed by EB and NGC for the Virginias as a major upgrade.

Conformal launchers and "real" conformal arrays...

________________ A corollary of Finagle's Law, similar to Occam's Razor, says:

There is a story on Naval Today about a visit by 8 Japanese delegates from MHI to Civmecs Henderson facility. Are Civmec a serious contender? Or is ASC the only Australian based contender.

Sorry attempted a link but it wouldn't go through.

They would be in the running for the construction of hull sections assembly and integration is so far beyond their experience and expertise there is no way, except in the dreams of the most delusional of the WA mafia, that they could build entire boats.

They would be in the running for the construction of hull sections assembly and integration is so far beyond their experience and expertise there is no way, except in the dreams of the most delusional of the WA mafia, that they could build entire boats.

I don't think that they have ever considered the prospect of building entire boats. However they have demonstrated the ability to build hull sections. Further, they seem to have ambitions to be a part of the future builds for other RAN assets. To this end they have taken over the Forgacs Tomago Dockyard in Newcastle.
MB

I don't think that they have ever considered the prospect of building entire boats. However they have demonstrated the ability to build hull sections. Further, they seem to have ambitions to be a part of the future builds for other RAN assets. To this end they have taken over the Forgacs Cairncross Dockyard in Newcastle.
MB

I read that but Cairncross dock is in Brisbane, it was the biggest in Oz before GI and I don't think they bought Carrington from Forgacs, just the Brisbane dock. Not sure about the Newcastle facilities though

I read that but Cairncross dock is in Brisbane, it was the biggest in Oz before GI and I don't think they bought Carrington from Forgacs, just the Brisbane dock. Not sure about the Newcastle facilities though

Actually, I was wrong - they bought the Forgacs site at Tomago in Newcastle.
I'll amend my first post
MB

Gidday mate and welcome aboard. One thing though could you please read the rules because one liners aren't welcome. It upsets the Moderators and they can be grumpy if they haven't been fed and sometimes we forget enjoy your time here. You are right in that a country does need a nuclear industry to support a nuclear navy.

The USN's most successful current program, the Virginia sub, has a recently discovered QC problem. So far, it only applies to three vessels and has to do with faulty steam pipes. Considering how complex these vessels are, the program has an impressive record.

Canada has been involved with nuclear power development for over 60 years and over 20,000 people are directly employed with another 10,000 sub- contractor employees. Nuclear powered vessels could be supported. If the RCN were allowed to pursue nuclear propulsion, it would likely have to be a foreign purchase as it is unlikely the government would support the creation of a submarine construction industry. We already have enough headaches with the surface ship industry.

You are right in that a country does need a nuclear industry to support a nuclear navy.

Why do they need a nuclear industry, the life of a modern nuclear subs reactor is the life of the submarine, there no need to refuel it ever. If Aussie bought SSN's from the US I would presume part of the deal would be returning them to the US when it was time for them to be deactived.

Why do they need a nuclear industry, the life of a modern nuclear subs reactor is the life of the submarine, there no need to refuel it ever. If Aussie bought SSN's from the US I would presume part of the deal would be returning them to the US when it was time for them to be deactived.

Stuff happens, having local support (which Canada has) that can deal with "nuclear" stuff just makes things easier and likely less expensive. Australia lacks this support so having SSNs is a steeper climb. Neither Canada or Australia will go for SSNs albeit for different reasons and both Electric Boat and Newport News would be hard pressed to offer export Virginias especially since the Ohio replacement is in the works. Perhaps the UK, US, Australia, and Canada should consider a future SSN for post 2050.

Why do they need a nuclear industry, the life of a modern nuclear subs reactor is the life of the submarine, there no need to refuel it ever. If Aussie bought SSN's from the US I would presume part of the deal would be returning them to the US when it was time for them to be deactived.

Kettles still need to be understood and maintained. Not needing to be refueled removes a major cost of ownership but not the need to look after them by suitably qualified and experienced personnel using suitably designed and certified processes, equipment and facilities, which all needs to come from somewhere. This could all be built from scratch, making extensive use of contracted talent but would be a lot easier and safer if there was an existing industry or capability to tap into, something that provides a critical mass of the required expertise.

This is not only for nuclear vessels, just look at the grief naval engineering is in following an extended period of "efficiency". In fact look across government and industry to see just how destructive amateurs assuming that robust, experienced and proven engineering capabilities are wasteful and unnecessary can be. i.e. lives lost, property destroyed.